IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i11p3853-d364460.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Methodological Review of Mixed Methods Research in Palliative and End-of-Life Care (2014–2019)

Author

Listed:
  • Sergi Fàbregues

    (Department of Psychology and Education, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, 08018 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Quan Nha Hong

    (Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre), University College London, London WC1H 0NR, UK)

  • Elsa Lucia Escalante-Barrios

    (Department of Education, Universidad del Norte, Barranquilla 0000, Colombia)

  • Timothy C. Guetterman

    (Graduate School of Health, Creighton University, Omaha, NE 68178, USA
    Department of Family Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48104, USA)

  • Julio Meneses

    (Department of Psychology and Education, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, 08018 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Michael D. Fetters

    (Department of Family Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48104, USA)

Abstract

Mixed methods research has been increasingly recognized as a useful approach for describing and explaining complex issues in palliative care and end-of-life research. However, little is known about the use of this methodology in the field and the ways in which mixed methods studies have been reported. The purpose of this methodological review was to examine the characteristics, methodological features and reporting quality of mixed methods articles published in palliative care research. The authors screened all articles published in eight journals specialized in palliative care between January 2014 and April 2019. Those that reported a mixed methods study (n = 159) were included. The Good Reporting of a Mixed Methods Study (GRAMMS) criteria were used to assess reporting quality. Findings showed that 57.9% of the identified studies used a convergent design and 82.4% mentioned complementarity as their main purpose for using a mixed methods approach. The reporting quality of the articles generally showed a need for improvement as authors usually did not describe the type of mixed methods design used and provided little detail on the integration of quantitative and qualitative methods. Based on the findings, recommendations are made to improve the quality of reporting of mixed methods articles in palliative care.

Suggested Citation

  • Sergi Fàbregues & Quan Nha Hong & Elsa Lucia Escalante-Barrios & Timothy C. Guetterman & Julio Meneses & Michael D. Fetters, 2020. "A Methodological Review of Mixed Methods Research in Palliative and End-of-Life Care (2014–2019)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-16, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:11:p:3853-:d:364460
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/11/3853/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/11/3853/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sergi Fàbregues & José F. Molina-Azorín, 2017. "Addressing quality in mixed methods research: a review and recommendations for a future agenda," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(6), pages 2847-2863, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Doris Y. P. Leung & Helen Y. L. Chan, 2020. "Palliative and End-of-Life Care: More Work is Required," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-7, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Herman Aguinis & Donald Bergh & José F. Molina-Azorin, 2023. "Methodological challenges and insights for future international business research," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 54(2), pages 219-232, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:11:p:3853-:d:364460. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.